Advantages

Juries aren't bound by precedent/ acts of parliament etc., and can make decisions according to their own conscience.

Open system of justice. Members of the public are involved.

Jurors aren't legal experts- keeps the law simpler

Less appeals- reasons for the juror's decisions are unknown

Jurors are free from pressure- can bring in verdicts unpopular with the public

This makes people more willing to serve

Juries are impartial.

Process of selection should create a cross representation of society

Cancel out each other's bias

Not case hardened

7 of 8

Disadvantages

Perverse decisions which cannot be justified. R v Kronlid: The defendants damaged a plane to prevent being used in a war.

Secrecy means that it is unclear whether or not the jurors understood the evidence.

R v Mirza: The HoL decided it could not look into events in a jury room. But could look into events that occured outside the jury room R v Young 1995: The jury tried to hold a seance to find out who the killer was.

Bias: Can still have prejudices which affect the verdict. E.g. Might be racist (Sander v UK)